PEER REVIEW PROCESS

Peer Review Process — Journal of Health Sciences and Collaborative Care (JHSCC)

Research submissions undergo double-anonymous review: author identities are concealed from reviewers and reviewer identities are concealed from authors. The OJS default is Anonymous Reviewer/Anonymous Author, with a minimum of two confirmed reviews. Editors must check review files and identifying metadata before assigning reviewers. Anonymity cannot be guaranteed when the study or a public preprint reveals identity; potential identification must be managed by the editor.

1. Submission and screening
The Editorial Office checks scope, completeness, reporting, references, ethics documentation, and originality. Unsuitable or incomplete manuscripts may be declined or returned before external review. Similarity screening is interpreted by an editor and is not itself proof of plagiarism.

2. Independent review
The handling editor selects reviewers with relevant expertise and no disqualifying conflicts. Author suggestions are advisory; editors retain selection authority. Reviewers assess originality, methods, analysis, ethical compliance, interpretation, limitations, and relevance to evidence-based care and health outcomes. Reviews must be constructive and confidential.

3. Editorial decision and revision
Editors consider the evidence and reviews when deciding acceptance, revision, or rejection. Authors provide a point-by-point response and revised files. Additional review is requested where necessary. Reviewer recommendations inform but do not replace editorial judgement. Fees do not influence acceptance.

4. Production
Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, layout, and proof checks before publication. Author approval of proofs does not authorise undocumented changes to the scientific record.

Deadlines
The configured invitation response deadline is two weeks and review completion period is three weeks. Actual processing time depends on reviewer availability, author revisions, and additional assessment. These are workflow deadlines, not a guaranteed acceptance or publication date.

Conflicts, confidentiality, and appeals
Conflicted editors or reviewers must disclose the conflict and recuse themselves. Manuscripts involving editors are handled independently. Review material is not shared or used for personal advantage. Appeals and ethical concerns are submitted to the Editorial Office through the Contact page and considered under the Publication Ethics policy.

Non-research content
Editorials and journal notices are identified as such and assessed editorially; they are not presented as externally reviewed research unless external review was actually performed.